Search

Background Mobility is defined as the ability to independently move around the environment and is a key contributor to quality of life, especially in older age. The aim of this study was to evaluate the use of mobility as a decisive outcome for the marketing authorisation of drugs by the European Medicines Agency (EMA). Methods Fifteen therapeutic areas which commonly lead to relevant mobility impairments and alter the quantity and/or the quality of walking were selected: two systemic neurological diseases, four conditions primarily affecting exercise capacity, seven musculoskeletal diseases and two conditions representing sensory impairments. European Public Assessment Reports (EPARs) published by the EMA until September 2020 were examined for mobility endpoints included in their 'main studies'. Clinical study registries and primary scientific publications for these studies were also reviewed. Results Four hundred and eighty-four EPARs yielded 186 relevant documents with 402 'main studies'. The EPARs reported 153 primary and 584 secondary endpoints which considered mobility; 70 different assessment tools (38 patient-reported outcomes, 13 clinician-reported outcomes, 8 performance outcomes and 13 composite endpoints) were used. Only 15.7% of those tools distinctly informed on patients' mobility status. Out of 402, 105 (26.1%) of the 'main studies' did not have any mobility assessment. Furthermore, none of these studies included a digital mobility outcome. Conclusions For conditions with a high impact on mobility, mobility assessment was given little consideration in the marketing authorisation of drugs by the EMA. Where mobility impairment was considered to be a relevant outcome, questionnaires or composite scores susceptible to reporting biases were predominantly used. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: COPD is a heterogeneous disease, but there is little consensus on specific definitions for COPD subtypes. Unsupervised clustering offers the promise of 'unbiased' data-driven assessment of COPD heterogeneity. Multiple groups have identified COPD subtypes using cluster analysis, but there has been no systematic assessment of the reproducibility of these subtypes.Objective: We performed clustering analyses across 10 cohorts in North America and Europe in order to assess the reproducibility of (1) correlation patterns of key COPD-related clinical characteristics and (2) clustering results.Methods: We studied 17 146 individuals with COPD using identical methods and common COPD-related characteristics across cohorts (FEV1, FEV1/FVC, FVC, body mass index, Modified Medical Research Council score, asthma and cardiovascular comorbid disease). Correlation patterns between these clinical characteristics were assessed by principal components analysis (PCA). Cluster analysis was performed using k-medoids and hierarchical clustering, and concordance of clustering solutions was quantified with normalised mutual information (NMI), a metric that ranges from 0 to 1 with higher values indicating greater concordance.Results: The reproducibility of COPD clustering subtypes across studies was modest (median NMI range 0.17-0.43). For methods that excluded individuals that did not clearly belong to any cluster, agreement was better but still suboptimal (median NMI range 0.32-0.60). Continuous representations of COPD clinical characteristics derived from PCA were much more consistent across studies.Conclusions: Identical clustering analyses across multiple COPD cohorts showed modest reproducibility. COPD heterogeneity is better characterised by continuous disease traits coexisting in varying degrees within the same individual, rather than by mutually exclusive COPD subtypes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Rationale: Pulmonary rehabilitation (PR) has demonstrated physiological, symptom-reducing, psychosocial, and health economic benefits for patients with chronic respiratory diseases, yet it is underutilized worldwide. Insufficient funding, resources, and reimbursement; lack of healthcare professional, payer, and patient awareness and knowledge; and additional patient-related barriers all contribute to the gap between the knowledge of the science and benefits of PR and the actual delivery of PR services to suitable patients.Objectives: The objectives of this document are to enhance implementation, use, and delivery of pulmonary rehabilitation to suitable individuals worldwide.Methods: Members of the American Thoracic Society (ATS) Pulmonary Rehabilitation Assembly and the European Respiratory Society (ERS) Rehabilitation and Chronic Care Group established a Task Force and writing committee to develop a policy statement on PR. The document was modified based on feedback from expert peer reviewers. After cycles of review and revisions, the statement was reviewed and formally approved by the Board of Directors of the ATS and the Science Council and Executive Committee of the ERS.Main Results: This document articulates policy recommendations for advancing healthcare professional, payer, and patient awareness and knowledge of PR, increasing patient access to PR, and ensuring quality of PR programs. It also recommends areas of future research to establish evidence to support the development of an updated funding and reimbursement policy regarding PR.Conclusions: The ATS and ERS commit to undertake actions that will improve access to and delivery of PR services for suitable patients. They call on their members and other health professional societies, payers, patients, and patient advocacy groups to join in this commitment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The objective of this document was to standardise published cardiopulmonary exercise testing (CPET) protocols for improved interpretation in clinical settings and multicentre research projects. This document: 1) summarises the protocols and procedures used in published studies focusing on incremental CPET in chronic lung conditions; 2) presents standard incremental protocols for CPET on a stationary cycle ergometer and a treadmill; and 3) provides patients' perspectives on CPET obtained through an online survey supported by the European Lung Foundation. We systematically reviewed published studies obtained from EMBASE, Medline, Scopus, Web of Science and the Cochrane Library from inception to January 2017. Of 7914 identified studies, 595 studies with 26 523 subjects were included. The literature supports a test protocol with a resting phase lasting at least 3 min, a 3-min unloaded phase, and an 8- to 12-min incremental phase with work rate increased linearly at least every minute, followed by a recovery phase of at least 2-3 min. Patients responding to the survey (n=295) perceived CPET as highly beneficial for their diagnostic assessment and informed the Task Force consensus. Future research should focus on the individualised estimation of optimal work rate increments across different lung diseases, and the collection of robust normative data., Competing Interests: Conflict of interest: T. Radtke reports personal fees for registration and travel/accomodation for conferences from Vifor Pharma, outside of the submitted work. Conflict of interest: S. Crook has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: G. Kaltsakas has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: G. Louvaris has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: D. Berton has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: D.S. Urquhart has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: A. Kampouras has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: R.A. Rabinovich has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: S. Verges has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: D. Kontopidis is President of the Hellenic Cystic Fibrosis Association. Conflict of interest: J. Boyd reports is an employee of the European Lung Foundation. Conflict of interest: T. Tonia reports acting as ERS Methodologist. Conflict of interest: D. Langer has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: J. De Brandt has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: Y.M.J. Goërtz has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: C. Burton has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: M.A. Spruit reports grants and personal fees from Boehringer-Ingelheim and AstraZeneca, personal fees from GSK and Novartis, congress travel support from TEVA, and grants from the Netherlands Lung Foundation, outside the submitted work. Conflict of interest: D.C.W. Braeken has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: S. Dacha has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: F.M.E. Franssen reports personal fees from AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Chiesi, GlaxoSmithKline and TEVA, and grants and personal fees from Novartis, outside the submitted work. Conflict of interest: P. Laveneziana reports personal fees from Novartis France and Boehringer France, outside the submitted work. Conflict of interest: E. Eber has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: T. Troosters has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: J.A Neder has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: M.A. Puhan has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: R. Casaburi reports that he shares patent US 7927251 B1, relating to a linear treadmill testing protocol, issued to Los Angeles Biomedical Research Institute. Conflict of interest: I. Vogiatzis has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: H. Hebestreit reports grants and personal fees from Vertex Pharmaceuticals, grants from Mukoviszidose e.V. (German CF Organization), outside the submitted work; and is the Coordinator of the European Cystic Fibrosis Society Exercise Working Group who discuss exercise testing and organise respective symposia., (Copyright ©ERS 2019.)

Objective: To use the concept of benchmarking to establish robust and standardized outcome references after pancreatico-duodenectomy (PD)., Background: Best achievable results after PD are unknown. Consequently, outcome comparisons among different cohorts, centers or with novel surgical techniques remain speculative., Methods: This multicenter study analyzes consecutive patients (2012-2015) undergoing PD in 23 international expert centers in pancreas surgery. Outcomes in patients without significant comorbidities and major vascular resection (benchmark cases) were analyzed to establish 20 outcome benchmarks for PD. These benchmarks were tested in a cohort with a poorer preoperative physical status (ASA class ≥3) and a cohort treated by minimally invasive approaches., Results: Two thousand three hundred seventy-five (38%) low-risk cases out of a total of 6186 PDs were analyzed, disclosing low in-hospital mortality (≤1.6%) but high morbidity, with a 73% benchmark morbidity rate cumulated within 6 months following surgery. Benchmark cutoffs for pancreatic fistulas (B-C), severe complications (≥ grade 3), and failure-to-rescue rate were 19%, 30%, and 9%, respectively. The ASA ≥3 cohort showed comparable morbidity but a higher in hospital-mortality (3% vs 1.6%) and failure-to-rescue rate (16% vs 9%) than the benchmarks. The proportion of benchmark cases performed varied greatly across centers and continents for both open (9%-93%) and minimally invasive (11%-62%) PD. Centers operating mostly on complex PD cases disclosed better results than those with a majority of low-risk cases., Conclusion: The proposed outcome benchmarks for PD, established in a large-scale international patient cohort and tested in 2 different cohorts, may allow for meaningful comparisons between different patient cohorts, centers, countries, and surgical techniques.

No current patient-centred instrument captures all dimensions of physical activity in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Our objective was item reduction and initial validation of two instruments to measure physical activity in COPD.Physical activity was assessed in a 6-week, randomised, two-way cross-over, multicentre study using PROactive draft questionnaires (daily and clinical visit versions) and two activity monitors. Item reduction followed an iterative process including classical and Rasch model analyses, and input from patients and clinical experts.236 COPD patients from five European centres were included. Results indicated the concept of physical activity in COPD had two domains, labelled "amount" and "difficulty". After item reduction, the daily PROactive instrument comprised nine items and the clinical visit contained 14. Both demonstrated good model fit (person separation index >0.7). Confirmatory factor analysis supported the bidimensional structure. Both instruments had good internal consistency (Cronbach's α>0.8), test-retest reliability (intraclass correlation coefficient ≥0.9) and exhibited moderate-to-high correlations (r>0.6) with related constructs and very low correlations (r<0.3) with unrelated constructs, providing evidence for construct validity.Daily and clinical visit "PROactive physical activity in COPD" instruments are hybrid tools combining a short patient-reported outcome questionnaire and two activity monitor variables which provide simple, valid and reliable measures of physical activity in COPD patients., (Copyright ©ERS 2015.)

This European Respiratory Society (ERS) statement provides a comprehensive overview on physical activity in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). A multidisciplinary Task Force of experts representing the ERS Scientific Group 01.02 "Rehabilitation and Chronic Care" determined the overall scope of this statement through consensus. Focused literature reviews were conducted in key topic areas and the final content of this Statement was agreed upon by all members. The current knowledge regarding physical activity in COPD is presented, including the definition of physical activity, the consequences of physical inactivity on lung function decline and COPD incidence, physical activity assessment, prevalence of physical inactivity in COPD, clinical correlates of physical activity, effects of physical inactivity on hospitalisations and mortality, and treatment strategies to improve physical activity in patients with COPD. This Task Force identified multiple major areas of research that need to be addressed further in the coming years. These include, but are not limited to, the disease-modifying potential of increased physical activity, and to further understand how improvements in exercise capacity, dyspnoea and self-efficacy following interventions may translate into increased physical activity. The Task Force recommends that this ERS statement should be reviewed periodically (e.g. every 5-8 years)., (©ERS 2014.)

Although physical activity is considered an important therapeutic target in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), what "physical activity" means to COPD patients and how their perspective is best measured is poorly understood. We designed a conceptual framework, guiding the development and content validation of two patient reported outcome (PRO) instruments on physical activity (PROactive PRO instruments). 116 patients from four European countries with diverse demographics and COPD phenotypes participated in three consecutive qualitative studies (63% male, age mean±sd 66±9 years, 35% Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease stage III-IV). 23 interviews and eight focus groups (n = 54) identified the main themes and candidate items of the framework. 39 cognitive debriefings allowed the clarity of the items and instructions to be optimised. Three themes emerged, i.e. impact of COPD on amount of physical activity, symptoms experienced during physical activity, and adaptations made to facilitate physical activity. The themes were similar irrespective of country, demographic or disease characteristics. Iterative rounds of appraisal and refinement of candidate items resulted in 30 items with a daily recall period and 34 items with a 7-day recall period. For the first time, our approach provides comprehensive insight on physical activity from the COPD patients' perspective. The PROactive PRO instruments' content validity represents the pivotal basis for empirically based item reduction and validation., (©ERS 2014.)

Objective: To test whether the newly developed comprehensive complication index (CCI) is more sensitive than traditional endpoints for detecting between-group differences in randomized controlled trials (RCTs)., Background: A major challenge in RCTs is the choice of optimal endpoints to detect treatment effects. Mortality is no longer a sufficient marker in studies, and morbidity is often poorly defined. The CCI, integrating all complications including their severity in a linear scale ranging from 0 (no complication) to 100 (death), is a new tool, which may be more sensitive than other traditional endpoints to detect treatment effects on postoperative morbidity., Methods: The CCI was tested in 3 published RCTs from European centers evaluating pancreas, esophageal and colon resections. To compare the sensitivity of the CCI with traditional morbidity endpoints, for example, presence of any (yes/no) or only the most severe complications, all postoperative events were assessed, and the CCI calculated. Treatment effects and sample size calculations were compared using the CCI and traditional endpoints., Results: Although RCTs failed to show between-group differences using any or most severe complications, the CCI revealed significant differences between treatment groups in 2 RCTs-after pancreas (P=0.009) and esophageal surgery (P=0.014). The CCI in the RCT on colon resections confirmed the absence of between-group differences (P=0.39). The required sample sizes in trials are up to 9 times lower for the CCI than for traditional morbidity endpoints., Conclusions: This study demonstrates superiority of the CCI to traditional endpoints. The CCI may serve as an appealing endpoint for future RCTs and may reduce the sample size.